• About Us
  • Activity
  • Advertising
  • Books
  • Business
  • Contact
  • Dashboard
  • EB5
  • Entertainment
  • feedback
  • Forgot Your Password?
  • Government
  • Home
  • Interviews
  • Login
  • Members
  • Meme generator
  • National
  • Nevada
  • Nevada News and Views
  • Newsmax
  • NN&V Ads
  • Opinion
  • Pick a New Password
  • Politics
  • Polls
  • Privacy Policy
  • Profile
  • Recent comments by me
  • Recent comments on my posts
  • Register
  • Submit post
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Confirmation
  • Survey
  • Survey
  • Terms of Service
  • Today’s Top 10
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Welcome!
  • Yop Poll Archive
Nevada News and Views
  • About Us
  • Advertising
  • Contact
  • More
    • Nevada
    • Opinion
    • Business
    • Travel
    • News
    • Sports
  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Pinterest

  • RSS

Opinion

Tax Repeal fight ain’t over ‘til it’s over

Tax Repeal fight ain’t over ‘til it’s over
N&V Staff
October 18, 2015

Chuck Muth(Chuck Muth, Citizen Outreach) – Paraphrasing the great Mark Twain, reports of the death of the We Decide Coalition’s referendum to repeal the largest tax hike in Nevada history – including that new gross receipts tax – have been greatly exaggerated.

While it’s true that on October 1, 2015, Carson City District Court Judge Todd Russell did rule that our original filed referendum violated the single-subject rule, as well as “description of effect” requirements, there’s a huge problem with his ruling.

He never should have heard the case in the first place.

On September 11, 2015, I filed a Petition for Removal with the federal court in Clark County, alleging constitutional infringements on our right to petition the government, as well as other First Amendment rights.  Notice of that request to remove the case from Judge Russell’s court was promptly and properly filed with the court clerk and opposing counsel.

And that’s where sub-section (d) of section 1446 of title 28 of the United States Code Service comes into play.  It reads, in part…

“Promptly after the filing of such notice of removal of a civil action, the defendant or defendants shall give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and shall file a copy of the notice with the clerk of such State court, which shall effect removal and the State court shall proceed no further unless and until the case is remanded.”

“…and the State court shall proceed no further…”

Pretty clear, even to a layman.

Nevertheless, at 2:30 pm on October 1, 2015, Judge Russell willfully conducted his hearing knowing a Petition for Removal had been filed, knowing that it had not been remanded (returned) to his court, and knowing that I would not be there.

Judge Russell, clearly itching to rule against the referendum, opened the hearing by asking the attorneys for the tax hikers if they thought he could hold the hearing even though he acknowledged the rule that he should “proceed no further.”

This was like a pregnant schoolteacher suffering from an insatiable and over-powering craving for ice cream asking a room full of second-graders if they’d like to go to Baskin Robbins for lunch.

Naturally, the attorneys for the tax hikers then proceeded to argue that the hearing could go forward despite the clear prohibition on doing so, venturing opinions as to why the federal court had no business interfering with their business.

The problem is it’s not their opinion that counts.  It’s the opinion of the federal court judge who was assigned my Petition for Removal.  And at the time of the writing of this column, the federal judge has not yet ruled.

As the saying goes, it ain’t over ‘til it’s over.  And despite all the media reports to the contrary, this tax repeal referendum ain’t over.

P.S.  Judge Russell’s action in this matter was so egregious, and resulted in such serious public relations damage to our referendum efforts, that I filed an official complaint against him this week with the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.

His conduct clearly undermined the public trust and confidence in our judicial system.  I mean if a judge doesn’t have to follow the rules, why should anyone else, right?

 

Mr. Muth is president of Citizen Outreach and the publisher of www.NevadaNewsandViews.com.  He personally blogs at www.MuthsTruths.com.

Prev postNext post

Related ItemsTax RepealTax Repeal Referendum
Opinion
October 18, 2015
N&V Staff

Related ItemsTax RepealTax Repeal Referendum

More in Opinion

Question 1 on Nevada Ballot is Not What It Seems

N&V StaffNovember 1, 2022
Read More

Roadmap To Saving Nevada

Troy La ManaOctober 21, 2022
Read More

The Lil Governor That Couldn’t

Troy La ManaOctober 10, 2022
Read More

Nevada Continues To Fail Our Students

Troy La ManaOctober 9, 2022
Read More

This Failed Policy Needs To End

Troy La ManaOctober 8, 2022
Read More

Viguerie: If We Stand Up for Parents’ Rights Now, We Will Win!

N&V StaffOctober 7, 2022
Read More
Scroll for more
Tap

Subscribe Free By Email

Looking for the best in breaking news and conservative views? Let Chuck do all the work for you! Subscribe to his FREE "Muth's Truths" e-newsletter.

* indicates required
Nevada News and Views
Nevada News & Views is an educational project of Citizen Outreach Foundation, a non-partisan IRS-approved 501(c)(3) organization. It is not associated or affiliated with any political party or group. Nevada News & Views is accessible by the public at no cost. It funds its operations through tax-deductible contributions from donors and supporters and does not accept government money or grants.

TAGS

Featured Article Nevada Politics business Muth's Truths government Opinion Government Muth’s Truths Obama Ron Knecht News Donald Trump GOP Republicans

Copyright © 2022 Citizen Outreach | Maintained by VirtualAlly

Those who fail to remember history… will see their life savings wiped out
Location, Location, Location: Why Venue Reform is a Necessity